Random Fact Sheet #38 – 30 Amazing Facts You Won’t Find Anywhere Else

- Sponsored Links -



In 1997, Microsoft saved Apple from bankruptcy by investing $150 million into the company.

27. A highly religious physician by the name of Rene' Laennec invented the stethoscope because he was uncomfortable putting his ear to the chest of women.

28. The double leg amputee war veteran named Gregory D. Gadson in the film "Battleship" is played by an actual double leg amputee war veteran.

29. Stephen Colbert's father and 2 brothers died in a plane crash when he was 10. His improv teacher told him "you gotta learn to love the bomb" and as a result, years later he came to realize "I love the thing that I most wish had not happened."

30. Cyril of Alexandria claimed that "camel" is a Greek misspelling in the phrase "It's easier for a camel to thread the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter heaven." He claimed camel was actually "kamilos," meaning rope.



- Sponsored Links -


    • This guy at work held a 10″ crescent wrench by his crotch and said that’s about right. Much laughter, bets made, debate whether to measure from top, bottom or side. Guy said measure tomorrow because he had sex with wife before work. Next day called off bet because there was ‘unnatural’ interest in bet. Probably went home and came up short doing measurement.

  1. RE: Fact# 3 – Sweden’s Trash: It is funny though, in Norway we would like to use our own garbage. However, by being a member of the European Economic Zone, we have to abide by the rules of free competition. Thus, call for bids. The problem then reveals itself by Sweden being less expensive compared with the Norwegian counterpart. Which results in Norway sending trucks of garbage to distant locations (in Sweden) with garbage, instead of recycling it in Norway – which would cause less carbon emission 🙂

    • Why is it impossible for Norway to include specific recycling methods in the bidding process? It appears to be quite easy to require without breaking free trade agreements.

    • Norway cannot compete with Sweden in this market since Norway hasn’t made investments in incinerators, electricity infrastructure, or heating infrastructure as Sweden has. That is unaffected by EU law.

        • America can afford enough nuclear power plants to power itself without ever having to rely on a coal, natural gas, solar, or wind plant again. It’ll save thousands of lives and pay for itself in a decade, all while reducing carbon emissions more than any other power source we have.

          However it’d also take about 5 years to get all the plants built, which isn’t very helpful right now.

    • To be fair, you have already sorted the “waste,” and the trash that cannot be recycled—or at least is not economically feasible—is transferred to Sweden to be burnt in power plants with extremely stringent requirements for controlled combustion and exhaust filtration.

      Source: Have worked with exhaust control and filtering in a few Swedish solid fuel powerplants. Both newly built and old ones that have been adapted for higher demands to reduce harmful output.

      But in exchange, we give the filtered-out ashes back to the Norwegians so they can take care of themselves (at least where I’ve worked).

      They have something going for them at least in that they take up far less room in a landfill and don’t emit any greenhouse gases.

      Compared to the emissions produced while burning the waste in Norway without upgrading the current power plants to the standards of the Swedish power plants burning them, the carbon emissions produced when transporting the garbage and ashes are insignificant. Moreover, exporting it is less expensive than upgrading and burning it at home.
      Money is king, and short-term financial gain is more significant than the actual benefits of burning your trash locally.

      For you, that is capitalism and globalism.

      Ironically, it wouldn’t be viable to carry trash in that manner if Norway didn’t pump out such absurd amounts of oil into the North Sea; instead, it would be more cost-effective to invest in local particle filtration and burn the waste on-site because their GDP would be smaller than Sweden’s.

      But I have no interest in that.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here